beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.15 2020노2159

사기등

Text

The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four months, and by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

1. The main points of the grounds for appeal are as follows: Each punishment (the defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and the defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A was at the end during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime of fraud, but there was a high possibility of criticism for the crime of this case.

However, the fact that the defendant A recognized the crime of this case and divided the wrong facts, and that the victims did not agree with the victim D and the victim T and each victim corporation in the trial at the court below did not punish the defendant A, etc. are favorable circumstances for the defendant A.

B. Defendant B embezzled the leased vehicle from victims for the purpose of raising business funds, acquired money, and forged the official document and private document in the process, and in light of the circumstances, contents, and method of the crime, etc., the fact that the crime is not very good is unfavorable to Defendant B.

However, the fact that the court below's judgment should take into account the equity in the case of embezzlement at the same time as the judgment of the court below which became final and conclusive, the return of all the vehicles embezzled to the victim company (2018 senior group3056), victim AH Co., Ltd. (2018 senior group7178), AP (2019 senior group243), the complainant Co., Ltd. (2020 senior group1265) agreed with both the defendant B and the withdrawal of the complaint, and the fact that the defendant B appears to be favorable to the defendant B.

C. Considering the above circumstances and other conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the age, character and conduct, the environment, the circumstances after the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, each punishment against the Defendants of the lower court is deemed to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants is with merit.

3. As the Defendants’ appeal is with merit, the judgment of the court below is in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.